Format

Send to

Choose Destination
Kidney Int Rep. 2018 Jun 12;3(6):1267-1275. doi: 10.1016/j.ekir.2018.06.002. eCollection 2018 Nov.

Consent for Genetic Biobanking in a Diverse Multisite CKD Cohort.

Author information

1
Division of Nephrology, Department of Pediatrics and Communicable Diseases, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA.
2
Division of Nephrology, Department of Internal Medicine, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA.
3
Division of Nephrology, Department of Medicine, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, New York, USA.
4
St. Clair Specialty Physicians, Detroit, Michigan, USA.
5
Division of Nephrology, Department of Internal Medicine, John H. Stroger, Jr. Hospital, Chicago, Illinois, USA.
6
Division of Nephrology, Department of Internal Medicine, Wayne State University, Detroit, Michigan, USA.
7
Division of Pediatric Nephrology, Levine Children's Hospital, Charlotte, North Carolina, USA.
8
Division of Cardiology, Department of Internal Medicine, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA.
9
Division of Nephrology, Department of Medicine, University of Arizona College of Medicine, Tuscon, Arizona, USA.
10
Division of Nephrology, Temple University School of Medicine, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.

Abstract

Introduction:

The goal of this study was to examine patterns in the likelihood of consent to genetic research among participants in a prospective kidney disease cohort and biobank, and to determine demographic, clinical, and socioeconomic factors linked to consent for ongoing and future genetic research.

Methods:

The Clinical Phenotyping Resource and Biobank Core (C-PROBE) enrolled 1628 adult and pediatric patients with chronic kidney disease from 2009 to 2017 across 7 sites in the United States. Participants were asked at annual study visits for consent to provide DNA samples for future genetic studies. We compared characteristics of participants by initial consent outcome and consent status at their most recent study visit.

Results:

Of the C-PROBE participants, 96% consented to genetic studies at their initial study visit. Although African Americans were slightly less likely to consent at baseline (93% vs. 97%, odds ratio = 0.3, P < 0.02), there were no significant racial or ethnic differences with longitudinal participation. Also, pediatric and adult genetic consent rates were equivalent. The major persistent differences in the likelihood of consent were based on enrollment site, which ranged from 85% to 100% (P < 0.0001).

Conclusion:

Overall, genetic consent rates for kidney research within the C-PROBE cohort were high. However, differences in consent rates over time and by recruitment site highlight the complexity of genetic consent for biobanking, and potential limitations for generalizability of observations.

KEYWORDS:

CKD; DNA storage; biorepository; genetic research; informed consent; minorities; translational research

Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for Elsevier Science Icon for PubMed Central
Loading ...
Support Center